Page images
PDF
EPUB

arrived at the crisis in which they could properly address them? They came at length, it seemed, to a resolution to petition the king in his way to parliament. In the course of his passage there, he was grossly insulted, and treated with atrocious violence. It had been contended, that there was no legal connexion between the previous meeting and the outrage committed on that occasion; but there was a high degree of probability that the one proceeded from the other. There was, in fact, a natural connexion

given us the example. In the reign of Edward 6th a more severe act was passed; and to it we owe the preservation of the reformed religion in our church; by which any person who circulated hand-bills, which brought a meeting together, who entered into resolutions inimical to the reformed religion, or called a meeting together by sounding a trumpet, even though he absented himself from the meeting, was liable to the penalties of high treason, if any thing treasonable passed at such meeting so convened. What would the learned gen-between the principle avowed and distleman mean to establish by his argument, that, when rebellious and civil wars existed, no such harsh measures were adopted? Did he mean, that we should wait for such an event to apply a remedy? Should we wait to see the calamitous scenes which passed in France re-acted here? Should we wait until a mild and amiable monarch should be led to the block? or, should we not prevent such threatened evils by a timely and temperate interference? Ought government to abdicate itself, by permitting the designs of factious men to overthrow the consti. tution With respect to the argument, drawn by his learned friend, from the charge of the judge, and the verdicts of the juries, on the trials of the supposed conspirators, he would only say, that the finding of the grand jury was a proof of the existence of the conspiracy, while the verdicts of the juries went only to the exculpation of individuals charged with being accomplices; it would therefore be absurd for them to say, that they must stop from applying remedies to the fact, because the guilt of an individual was not established; for the office of a legislator was governed by very different principles from that of a juror. With regard to the conspiracy, the moral probability remained the same, and the verdicts of the juries did not at all impeach the report of the secret committee. Could the House possibly forget the transactions of the London Corresponding Society? Had it escaped gentlemen's recollection, that they had formerly decided not to petition parliament; that they represented the government and constitution merely as impositions and grievances on the public; that they were chiefly employed in disseminating writings subversive of both; and that on the murder of Louis 16th, they addressed the National Convention, saying, that that unhappy country had

persed at that meeting, and the fact that
followed. Whether or or no the paper
intituled (6
King-killing" was espoused
and circulated at that meeting, Jacobin
principles were asserted to the utmost
extent; and the former doctrine was only
an inference from them. So far had they
carried their principles, that they even
found fault with the government of France,
as not being sufficiently Jacobinical, since
it admitted a distinction between those
who had property and those who had
none; a distinction which Mr. Thelwall
had publicly declared to be " infamous;"
and regretted that he had not the voice
of Stentor, to make himself heard in
every part of the assembly. They came
to a resolution at the meeting to petition
the king, and address the nation. The
petition not having been noticed, they
declared afterwards, that it was either
suppressed or passed over with unfeeling
contempt. It remained, therefore, to in-
quire, whether the bill was such a one as
they ought to adopt under the present cir-
cumstances? The act would not, he
said, prevent any public meeting called
by sheriffs, magistrates, or corporations.
It even authorized others, under certain
conditions, if notice be given by three
householders. They must, besides, far-
ther assign the object; and what res-
traint was it to the known constitutional
meetings of the country, to enact that
it should not be held if the subject was
on the face of it seditious? The magis-
trate might, however disperse it, if, for
whatsoever ostensible cause it was called,
the deliberations or resolutions became
seditious. One of the clauses prohibited
political lectures where money was taken;
this was properly meant, to check the
pernicious practices of disseminating se-
dition under the unsuspecting garb of
amusement and instruction, At these
places the doctrine of holy insurrection

and sovereignty were blended with amusement: but, in endeavouring to restrain these new-fangled occupations, it was strange to be reproached with limiting the old customs and established usages of the country. To clubs and meetings such as these, and not to the ancient despotism, France had owed all its miseries. For these reasons he heartily approved of the bill.

Mr. Harrison said, he abhorred as much as any man the outrage committed on the person of his majesty; he nevertheless could not consent to implicate bodies of men in the atrocious transactions of a few individuals. The pressure of distresses occasioned by the war, together with the high price of provisions, had produced ill-temper, and a disposition among the lower classes, which in a moment of madness, might prompt some of them to make so desperate an attempt: the way to prevent the repetition of such crimes, was not, however by acts of unexampled severity, but by giving them peace, and putting measures in such a train that their distresses might subside. If the necessity for farther laws could be satisfactorily proved, no man would be more ready than himself to promote them; but it had not been shown that the present laws were defective; on the contrary, the crown lawyers themselves had proved them to be sufficient. Should this bill pass, there would be an end of all freedom of debate, of inquiry into the conduct of ministers, and of every means of obtaining a redress of grievances.

The Earl of Mornington said, that the circumstances which constituted the necessity for the present measure, and the applicability and competency of the measure to the urgency of the case, struck him so forcibly, that he was surprised so much difference of opinion had arisen upon it; he would therefore endeavour, not without hopes of success, to explain it distinctly to the House. The whole scope of the case resolved itself, in his mind, into three distinct heads of consideration. The first was, did there exist an evil of magnitude sufficient to call for some remedy? Next, was there power in the law, as it stood, adequate to the evil? And, thirdly, was the bill under consideration competent to meet the evil, or did it exceed the degree of power ne cessary for that purpose? On the second and third of these questions much had already been said; he would there

fore confine himself to the first chiefly; and he hoped to make it appear, that there was not to be found, in the whole records of history, any one case that called so loudly for the interference of parliament. Much difference of opinion respecting the meetings lately held had prevailed, and the outrageous assault on that part of the constitution which the House was particularly called on to guard and protect. Upon this gentlemen had spoken, each according to the impression his mind had received, and each referring to a cause correspondent to that impression. One hon. gentleman had said, that it was an accidental outrage. Let the House consider whether it would be possible to persuade the nation, that the sovereign was insulted, and personally assaulted in his way to parliament, by accident, or, in other words, without cause or motive. Gentlemen had corrected themselves, and said, that it was not owing to accident, but to a plot of the government, in order to propagate an opinion of the disloyalty of the nation. In contradiction of those two suppositions, some gentlemen had said, that ministers had endeavoured to prove that the loyalty of the nation was never so high as at present, as if they were determined to contradict their first, second, and third assertions. same moment they had farther declared, that it was owing neither to accident nor to a plot of government, but to the feelings of the people, irritated by an unsuc cessful war, and a scarcity of bread. On these different assertions, loose and contradictory as they were, he would say but few words. An hon. gentleman had asked, did it ever before happen, that the sacred person of the sovereign was so outraged?

At the

To this he would answer, that if it never did happen before, if the minds and character of the people were so changed and brutalized, was not the House to look for some other cause, and inquire what that dark, motive could be, that armed the people against their sovereign? And would not that inquiry lead them, by natural and obvious steps, to those societies, whose existence, even the scepticism of the warmest opposers of the bill, could not deny, and whose whole transactions were obviously founded on principles that led directly to the act already commemorated? He would not refer to former proceedings, or the report of the secret committee, nor would he advert to the trials of the supposed con

spirators, but would content himself with intreating the House to recollect, what the principles of those societies had been, simply as matters of fact, and what their own opinions respecting them were, at the beginning of 1795, when they renewed the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act. Having desired gentlemen to keep these points continually in memory, he would farther beg their attention while he took a view of the transactions of the societies since that time; as they came under the observation, not only of himself, but of every one, and were taken from authority not to be doubted; their own writings and publications. At the conclusion of last session, he had hopes that the mischiefs which had arisen to the people of France from the wild principle that every individual had a right to share in the sovereignty, and that it was a violation of that right to admit of any qualification of property in election; that the dreadful examples of the bad consequences arising to all, even the lowest orders of the people of that unhappy country, from that principle, and (to use the words of the detestable Robespierre) from the "despotism of liberty," would have had some influence on the minds of the people, and prevented the farther progress of the same ruinous principles among them: that it would have occurred to them, how very few of all those who rose from the dregs of society, and rioted in the blood and treasure of the nobility and gentry of France, had come to such an end as to leave them just objects of envy; how many of them followed each other to the scaffold, immediately on the heels of those they murdered; how many that stood at the highest pinnacle of elevation on one day, were hurried on the next to the guillotine. He had hopes that these glaring effects of the French revolution would have brought to the minds of those who were engaged in deep adventures here, that, though such men might have a temporary prosperity, that prosperity must necessarily be short, and that their fall would be more rapid than their rise. Full fraught with these hopes, he had given his assent to suffering the expiration of the act for suspending the Habeas Corpus act; but most grievously was he disappointed in his hopes; for he found that the parliament was scarcely prorogued, before those societies again recommenced their former practices upon the public

mind, with increased activity, and additional vigour; again held general meetings, and again developed their designs. in publications, which stated "that they had suffered a storm; that their vessel was endangered, but now had put to sea with greater prospect of success than ever; that they had the satisfaction to see their principles actively propagating among their countrymen; and that their numbers multiplied at the rate of 150 new members in a week, and sometimes 70 or 80 in a day." It seemed as if the whole of the British nation were convened on this extraordinary occasion; for, upon their own declaration, they had renewed their system, and increased the means of propagating their doctrines. They had told the people what they were to expect from inertness, and what from supplication, and exclaimed, "How long, O foolish countrymen, will you call upon Hercules!" The meaning of which was easy to be understood.-He must again request gentlemen to keep constantly in their view, the principle disclosed by those societies previous to the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act. That principle was adhered to with additional zeal, and the spirit of enforcing it was so far increased, that the House would find these societies criticising and condemning the constitution of France as an imperfect system; inasmuch as the principle of equality had been abandoned; because, in the formation of that constitution, property had been made a necessary qualification in electors, and the right of unlimited universal suffrage had been abandoned. The better to carry their plans into execution, they affected to adopt a pacific system, declaring, as their resolutions stated, "That they did not mean to demand rights with arms, but by certain measures, in such a nature that the House of Commons must accede to them; and that if any despaired of obtaining a reform, and looked for that to riot, they would tell them, that it was not riot that could bring about that revolution which every one must wish for." This pacific system, however, was only to be continued, provided the parliament would voluntarily submit to the absurd and extravagant doctrines of universal suffrage and annual parliaments, which was neither more nor less than a complete surrender of the constitution. The ignorance of the lower classes of the people, who, through prejudice and bad habits, still nursed and cherished a regard for artificial

distinctions, which they proposed in time to remove, these new legislators stated to be the prop of the constitution; and this ignorance they proposed to remove, in order that the constitution might fall; and this happy accomplishment, this general illumination, they declare, is only to be affected by cheap publications, circulated in different channels to the people, the expenses of which were to be defrayed from the revenue of the society, and any person who chose to take up the trade of a bookseller, and assist in the publication of them, was to be encouraged. He would show the House what sort of light this illumination threw around them; and in doing so, he would speak of three societies concerned in this negociation; the London Corresponding Society, the Society of the Friends of Liberty, and the London Reforming Society. He assured them, he would not quote a single word but from books sold by the printers and booksellers of those societies; printers and booksellers not only employed, but recommended by them, and called patriot booksellers; in whose hands, moreover, the petition of the meeting at Copenhagen-house was left for the purpose of receiving signatures. The tenor of the books from which he quoted, was neither more nor less than to excite the poor to seize the landed property of the kingdom; to stir up the soldiery to mutiny; to degrade and debase the naval and military character, and stigmatize every naval and military success as a misfortune; to represent the administration of justice as corrupt from its very source, and the judges as venal and influenced by the king and his ministers; to mark the nobility as a degraded race, and to invite the people to strike them from their seats; to represent monarchy as a burthen, and an hereditary monarchy as useless, absurd, and founded on false principles, and to take every opportunity of ridiculing the person of our sovereign with the most immoderate licentiousness; to recommend regicide, as he would presently undertake to show, to blaspheme the scriptures, and revile religion, as accessaries to the system which they condemn as ruinous, oppressive, and corrupt; and lastly, to decry the established church and constitution, till they had wrought the people to that pitch of frantic rage, that would inevitably end in their pulling down the pillar of the state, and burying the whole fabric in one undistinguishable

mass of ruin.-He proceeded to read the publications alluded to in elucidation of the propositions before stated; and first, he read from a pamphlet, " that thejlanded property of the country was originally got by conquest, or by encroachment on the property of the people; and as those public robbers, who had so obtained its possession, had shown no moderation in the use of it, it would not be fit to neglect the precious opportunity of recovering their rights, a few hearty fellows, with arms, &c. might take possession of the whole; a particular committee be appointed to receive it; all the possessors be called upon to deliver up to that committee their writings and documents, in order to be burned; and the owners be made to disgorge the last payment of their tenants, in order to form a fund for 'good citizens;' and if the aristocracy arose in resistance, let the people be firm, and dispatch them, cutting them off root and branch." This was published by a bookseller and printer, at whose house the Copenhagenhouse petition of the 12th of November lay to be signed. One passage he thought it necessary to read, as it contained a direct incitement to regicide. It was a definition of a guillotine, An instrument (as they called it) of rare invention. As it is the custom to decapitate and not hang kings, it is proper to have this instrument ready to make death easy to them, supposing a necessity of cutting them off. This instrument is used only for great malefactors, such as kings, bishops, and prime ministers. England and France have had their regular turns in executing their kings! France did it last, &c. &c." and, in conclusion, Ankerstroem and Damiens, the two regicides were held up to the reverence of mankind. This too, was from a printer, given to the public by the societies, in the list of patriotic printers. [Name him, name him, came from all parts of the House.] Citizen Lee, said his lordship.-What can the House now suppose is the tendency of this pacific system, this bloodless conquest? Sir, would it not be supposed, that, instead of being the production of Englishmen, this foul, most foul treason-[Hear, hear!] I do not say, that if brought in the judgment of a court it would be decided to be treason; but I will maintain, that the heart that uttered it was the heart of as foul a traitor as ever raised the dagger of a parricide. It is not even English treason. No, Sir; it is all French treason. Would not one ra

are strong, feed them with poison? His lordship declined entering on the discussion of the remaining points; he had however felt himself bound by his duty to the House and to the public, to state thus much; and he left it to others, who were blessed with better health and more vigour, to deal with the other parts of the subject.

ther suppose that I was reading the bloody page of Marat, or the sanguinary code of Robespierre, than the production of an Englishman? On his own knowledge, his lordship said, he could venture to state, unequivocally, that a production intituled "King-killing," and another, "the Reign of George the Last," were sold at Copenhagen-house. Under such impressions as these, did the persons assembled go there to discuss political subjects? There the present scarcity was attributed, not to failure of crops, but to parliamentary corruption. He wished the House to consider what the effect of such topics on minds so prepared must have been. This was not all that had passed. The people were taught that they had no hope left from legislative or executive powers, but that they were to look to themselves alone, since they could hope for no redress from the constituted authorities. One circumstance more remained to be mentioned, which was, that when all the nation was in consternation and horror at the insult offered to his majesty, a printer had the audacity to publish a libel, in which the whole of the circumstances were misrepresented, to excite the ridicule and contempt of the people. He left the House to determine, from these indisputable facts, whether there was not an obvious connexion between the societies and that outrage. It had been said, that this was a libel upon Englishmen, who have been educated in rational freedom, and could never be so lost to the sense of their interest as to violate the blessings they enjoy. Would the hon. gentleman who asserted this, deny that other free nations have suffered by the dissemination of these doctrines, that America, and more particularly Geneva, were not injured by them? Be it remembered, that revolutions are frequent with republican governments; in Geneva such evils were less likely in consequence of their habits of order and religion. The only revolution which had been marked with blood there, and where the priests were murdered was the late one. The smallness of the numbers who entertained these opinions was also an objection; but let the hon. gentleman recollect, that the number of those were small who accomplished the French revolution, who brought about the massacres of the 10th of August and 2d of September; and they were small too in their numbers who caused the commotions in Geneva. Would you, he asked, because the constitutions of the people of England

Mr. Sheridan said, that some things had fallen from the noble lord upon which it was impossible for him to remain silent. Exactly two years ago, at the opening of the session, he remembered to have seen the noble lord with the same sonorous voice, the same placid countenance, in the same attitude, leaning gracefully upon the table, and giving an account from shreds and patches of Brissot, that the French republic would last but a few months longer. Unfortunately for the credit of the noble lord, not one word of all his predictions had come to pass. He believed the noble lord was as much in the right in predicting that a revolution would follow, from the proceedings of certain societies, as he had been in his former predictions of the rapidly approaching ruin and destruction of the French Republic. The arguments the noble lord had made use of, to prove the connexion between the proceedings of the London Cerresponding Society, and the accidental outrage that had been offered to the person of the sovereign, neither dazzled his sight nor satisfied his understanding. The more closely to follow the noble lord through his elaborate composition, he would begin with his first argument, that such an insult as that offered to his majesty had never been before attempted. He most sincerely wished the fact were otherwise but, unfortunately, there had been many instances of similar misconduct, among which, one that took place at the Middlesex election. Assuming that as an historical fact, which was not true, the noble lord had endeavoured to establish the proofs of his connexion; and after examining a variety of causes, none of which could at all apply, he looked about for another cause, and found one novel and extraordinary, namely, the societies. Surely the noble lord had forgotten, that long before his majesty's procession to parliament, and long before the meeting at Copenhagen-house, there were tumults and disorders in various parts of the kingdom, which he believed the noble lord, with all his ingenuity, could not be able

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »